Skip to main content

tv   The Lead With Jake Tapper  CNN  January 31, 2018 1:00pm-2:00pm PST

1:00 pm
and pop shops, saying i want to fix roads and bridges. but putting the $1.5 trillion price tag, that's the kind of thing only president trump will get republican tosses possibly get on board. >> thank you so much. good to see you. thanks for being me. let's go to washington. are "the lead" with jake tapper begins now. welcome. we begin with a major development in the russia investigation. one that assuredly will be of great interest to special counsel robert mueller as he investigates whether or not the president of the united states, donald trump, attempted to obstruct justice in the russia investigation. cnn is breaking news about a meeting in december between president trump and the deputy attorney general, rod rosenstein, the justice department official assume vising the mueller probe. sources say that he visit that had white house seeking president trump's support in fighting off dwomts from
1:01 pm
republicans on the house intelligence committee and what democrats say is an attempt to undermine the fbi and more broadly, the mueller investigation. but according to our sources, president trump was more concerned with other issues such as rod rosenstein's loyalty. cnn evan perez and pamela brown join me. he went to the white house and then what happened? >> so this was a meeting in december between president trump and rod rosenstein. don mcgahn was also there. and at the time intent of this meeting was rosenstein asking for the president's help to block document demands from house intelligence chairman devin nunes. sources familiar with the meeting saying the president had other things to his mind. you may recall the testimony back last december. the president asked rosenstein where he thought the investigation of links between russians and his campaign is headed and he won't he to ask
1:02 pm
whether rosenstein was, quote, on my team. as a reminder, rosenstein oversees mueller's investigation. this is only the latest to document light that president trump asks questions that sometimes cross a line that presidents try to avoid when dealing with the justice department. there could rats further questions whether trump was seeking to interfere in the investigation by special counsel robert mueller who was looking into collusion by the trump campaign and obstruction of justice by the white house. >> shock go. so the president according to your sources asked where the russia investigation was heading and asked if he was on his team. for a loyalty oath. the former fbi director has fetched the president asked him for his loyalty. did rosenstein think this was a similar request? >> we're told that rosenstein appeared surprised by the
1:03 pm
president's comments and questionsest didn't provide any details about the rush investigation but he responded awkwardly to the team request. he said of course we're all on your team, mr. president. rosenstein was asked about loyalty pledges. here's with a he had to say. >> is it ever appropriate for the president of the united states to demand an department of justice official or fbi direct or take a loyalty pledge? >> i don't have any opinion with that. nobody has asked me to take a loyalty pledge other than oath of office. >> so at that hearing rosenstein was telling lawmakers, as long as you're following your oath of office, you can be faithful to the administration. the justice department declined to comment and the white house hasn't gotten back to us. clearly, he was uncomfortable with these times of questions and you can see where he's struggling to tell lawmakers that he can be both loyal to his
1:04 pm
oath of office while being part of this administration. >> i suppose a lawyer could figure out a way to make it technically true. that somebody asking if you have loyalty and making a loyalty request are not exactly the same thing. pamela, your reporting shows the president seemed particularly focused on the december hearing. tell us more. >> that's right. the president brought up the upcoming hearing with rod rosenstein. one source said the president went so far as to suggest specific questions to members of xong they could then ask rosenstein in the hearing. one was whether rosenstein appointed robert mueller to investigate russian meddling in the 2016 election because mueller was not selected as the fbi director. cnn has reported that president trump has been venting to his-based rosenstein in recent sgeeks raised the possibility of
1:05 pm
firing him. and sources tell us that president trump believed rosenstein was upset that mueller was not selected as the fbi director and responded tom by making him special counsel. it does not appear the questions at the president tried plant with members of congress were ever asked in that meeting. >> i'm no lawyer but it would seem that since we know mueller is looking into getting evidence and giving testimony about firing comey, threatening to fire mueller, expressing frustrations with rosenstein, expressing frustrations with sessions and on and on. this might be part of that evidence for a possible obstruction of justice charge. >> i think it is naturally a question. you're laying out a pattern and i think that's what prosecutors would try to do as they try to lay out a case. we know that rod rosenstein
1:06 pm
talked about in that hearing how he and mueller are in communication constantly. he oversees the investigation, obviously. you have to think if he thought this was relevant, and our reporting might make it he said more relevant. that he will have to explain what he thought about it. >> and you look back. in isolation, you may think, he could have been kidding. you look back to what james comey claimed that he asked him about. the loyalty and who he voted for. which could be seen as, are you on my teamed kind of thing. if you look at i as a whole, i imagine investigators will be interested in how that fits into that puzzle. >> so theoretically, a president could say, whatever do you with the russian investigation, just get to the truth. find out the truthful not are you on my team. >> and traditionally, there's supposed to be a certain protocol. and you're dealing with the situation here where rod
1:07 pm
rosenstein is overseeing the russia probe and the president and his campaign is part of that probe. those two are not supposed to be having a conversation about that investigation. >> great reporting. thank you so much. appreciate it. last night at the state of the union, the president called for washington to seek out common ground and summon unity. about six minutes after president trump finish that had speech, he was caught on a hot mike reassuring a house republican he would release a controversial memo written by house republicans accusing the fbi of surveillance abuses against the trump team. this memo drafted by the house intelligence committee republican staff, led by devin nunes, is perhaps the most contentious partisan issue on capitol hill. they say it is cherry picked, misleading. they say it is a bhoim one that you were to smear the investigation.
1:08 pm
that civil liberties may have been violated and transparency must rule the day. regardless of the state of the union theme of unity, he is clearly not seeking common ground. t the. >> he said oh yeah, don't worry. >> but today they said they have grave concerns over what is in the document is that what is not in the document. >> while we've later these concerns from law enforcement officials. we did not expect a public statement from the fbi director
1:09 pm
challenging the president's position on. this let me read one of the lines that sums up exactly what the fbi's concern here is. it says as expressed during our initial review, we have grave concerns about material omissions of fact that fundamentally impact the memo's accuracy. and law enforcement officials have said to us is that their kernel is that this memo does not give a full picture of what the fbi was doing in terms of the fisa and gathering intelligence. shortly after the fbi put out their statement, devin nunes responded. here's what he said. having stone walled congress for information for nearly a year, it is no surprise to see the fbi and d.o.j. issue spurious objections to the allowing the american people to see information related to surveillance abuses at these agencies.
1:10 pm
however the fbi cannot make thought public because these are fisa materials. highly classified intelligence that the fbi has gathered and devin nunes knows this. so this is an issue for the fbi. this goes to the heart of what their complaints are. that it is not. these memos do not accurately portray the entire picture. >> let's talk about the breaking news, the allegations, the story that sources are telling cnn in december. rod rosenstein who oversees the russia investigation goes to the white house, tries to beat pact with the nunes request for information. but president trump instead
1:11 pm
seems more interested asking him where the russia investigation is going and asking rosenstein if he is on his team. are you on my team. i'll give you a chance and then david irving. >> first, one wonders, did mr. rosenstein make notes of that conversation. after jim comey was asked by the president for his loyalty, comey was so disconcerted by that he made notes. i have no idea if rosenstein did but that's something mr. mueller will want to know right away. did mr. rosenstein or anyone in that meeting make contemporaneous notes. second, does this fit a pattern of attempt to obstruct justice. if you have a situation where you ask the fbi director for his loyalty, then fire him, he asks the assistant fbi director, who did you vote for, fires him. he asked mike rodgers, would they intervene? he asked several members of the
1:12 pm
house and senate. you're getting a body of evidence that the president is obsessed with russia and trying to stop the investigation. that's a real problem for the charges of obstruction of justice. the president is giving mueller a whole lot of proof. >> nice try, paul, but i think it will fall short at the end of the day. today's reporting by cnn on this, there are three people in the room according to the sources here. don mcgahn, the president and the deputy attorney general. only those three folks know what was said or not said. you saw the deputy attorney general testify under oath that he was not asked to take a loyalty pledge. you can only have it one way. >> asking if he is on his team is not a loyalty pledge. >> you can have it one way. either rod rosenstein is a straight shooter which i believe 100%. i don't think he would go to congress is that try to mislead them. i think under oath he testified
1:13 pm
and he answer that had question. >> are you saying it didn't happen? >> i'm saying the deputy attorney general went under oath and testified, i would take his word for it. >> there are a lot of things we keep hearing that are 100% accurate. you're saying rod rosenstein, that he said he was never asked for a loyalty oath. if if it happened as it did, i don't think that's perjury. i think are you on apply team is not a loyalty oath. >> if he did say that, paul would be on this show saying, that could be perjury. it is pretty close to a lie. >> sadly i've will a lot of experience looking at what is and is not perjury. and it is not close. i'm quite sure that the deputy attorney general didn't want to blow up his relationship with the president of the united states. and the question gave him enough wiggle room. this is what's going to happen. if you're right, the three
1:14 pm
people were in that room. the president of the united states, his counsel, and deputy attorney general are rosenstein. all of them will be sworn under oath, interviewed, which carries a criminal penalty the they lie, by mr. mueller. if congress gets into it, i have no idea. from the white house perspective, the exposure is to mueller and the risk is obstruction of justice. this fits into a pattern. sometimes you hear things and you say that doesn't sound like him. that sounds exactly like him. >> just because there's smoke doesn't mean there's fire. just because some of those things occurred or not occurred, doesn't mean obstruction of justice. it is a long leap to prove criminal intent and obstruction. and for that to the house or whomever. >> absolutely. do you believe comey's story that the president asked him for
1:15 pm
his loyalty? do you believe the "washington post" story that he asked mccabe here voted for? >> i wasn't in there. these are good reporters, the post. >> you know the president and you know he does care about loyalty. that's an important thing for him. >> yeah. like anybody, right? so president clinton wanted folks on his team. folks that he knew they were loyal to the team. i'm not saying that the president doesn't value loyalty. i don't think he is reckless enough in those cases to go ahead and pull the deputy attorney general into a room and ask him that after knowing what was taking place. i think you heard again, i'll say it again. rod rosenstein, a very straight guy testified before congress that did not occur. i take him at his word. >> i don't know that he testified he that didn't occur. >> we have much more to discuss. could releasing this memo be a
1:16 pm
violation of security? james clapper will join me to discuss it. eived the diagnoses, i knew at that exact moment ... i'm beating this. my main focus was to find a team of doctors. it's not just picking a surgeon, it's picking the care team and feeling secure in where you are. visit cancercenter.com/breast luckily, office depot®not officemax® is hereeart. to take care of you. ♪ taking care of business with print services done right. on time. guaranteed! expert tech support. and this week all dell pcs are up to twenty five percent off! save even more when you purchase a dell monitor. and make sure you protect your investment. office depot® officemax. officedepot.com ♪ taking care of business
1:17 pm
what can a president [ do in thirty seconds? he can fire an fbi director who won't pledge his loyalty. he can order the deportation of a million immigrant children. he can threaten an unstable dictator armed with nuclear weapons. he can go into a rage and enter the nuclear launch codes. how bad does it have to get before congress does something?
1:18 pm
1:19 pm
this is frank. sup! this is frank's favorite record. this is frank's dog. and this is frank's record shop. frank knowns northern soul, but how to set up a limited liability company... what's that mean? not so much. so he turned to his friends at legalzoom. yup! they hooked me up. we helped with his llc, contracts, and some other stuff that's part of running a business. so frank can focus on the beat. you hear that? this is frank's record shop. and this is where life meets legal.
1:20 pm
sources are telling cnn that president trump asked the deputy attorney general rod rosenstein who oversees robert mueller's investigation, where the investigation was headed and reportedly asked rosenstein, quote, are you on my team? this story was broken in the last block as allegedly happened in a december white house meeting. your reaction to this news. the president asking the guy in charge of assume vising the russia investigation where is it headed and asking, are you on my team? >> well, it is very reminiscent. maybe not as direct for the
1:21 pm
loyalty. a pledge of loyalty that he elicited from jim comey. and it seems to reflect either willful disregard or ignorance of the three branches of government which seem to be eroding right now. his supporters would say he has every right to ask rosenstein any question. because he is part of the executive branch. >> i think that's true. i do think that the deputy, with the relationship between white house and the department of justice, at least historically or conventionally. and there administration is not
1:22 pm
conventional. there's always been a difference and a sensitivity about keeping that relationship somewhat distant. because the importance of the independence of the judiciary system, the investigatory system, at least the past administration in the white house was very differential. that's not the case here. >> so rosenstein makes the third top law enforcement official whom president trump seems to have asked for loyalty one way or the other. he asked comey in are a meeting. later he asked dom drop the probe into michael flynn whom he had fired. we've learned the president asked the deputy director andrew mccabe who was shown earlier this week who he voted for in the presidential election. it does seem to be fitting a pattern. i'm not a lawyer. does this look like obstruction
1:23 pm
of justice to you? >> i'm not a lawyer either. and i can't say legally or tech flickly, whether there meets the threshold for obstruction of justice. as a layman it sure does. >> do you think that rod rosenstein needs to come forward and explain what happened? and tell the whole story? >> well, that's up to him. i frankly, i wouldn't know what to advise him. whether that would make the situation worse, if he could clarify how he interpreted what the president nld. he may have interpreted it. and that is reflected in his testimony. he may have interpreted it quite benignly. i don't think former direct or jim comey, he didn't consider it benign. >> so let's turn to the nunes memo. >> if i could, i think the point here, are you a member of the
1:24 pm
team, is different, a different nuance than enlisting a personal pledge of loyalty of there could be a difficult and that may have caused rod rosenstein to react differently than jim comey. >> certainly. but would you also acknowledge that it would be more comforting to know that a president said to somebody leading an investigation, well, get to the bottom of it or find the truth, as opposed to, are you on my team. >> exactly. it would be a better course here he that if the president said, we need to get to the bottom of this, whatever it is. you'll have my full cooperation. this would be better for everybody and better for the country if that were the posture he were in. >> let's turn to the nunes memo which could be released at any moment. we've heard it will be in a hot
1:25 pm
moment. we know he christopher wray, a trump appointee, has pleaded with the white house not to release it. do you think if the white house releases it against his wishes, the fbi director, that could or should even prompt a resignation? >> it would certainly be a very serious affront. and again, kind of an assault on the principles of the fbi. the thing that struck me first, good on director wray for make go it, good for no other reason than to try to defend the great men and women of the fbi. with all the asking you in the media with he the sources and methods, what it dwelled on was the errors of fact by omission. the fact that the fbi would put
1:26 pm
out a statement with that concern, rather handle the sources and methods. there may be sources and methods of consideration. to me that struck me as quite significant. >> the allegation is that, i haven't seen the memo. but devin nunes and the comments seem to be the officials in the fbi who were seeking a pfizer warrant against carter page relied too much on a political document that, the color steele dossier, funded by democrats, even if you trust word of christopher steele, a former british agent, it was too much reliant on that and that the fisa warrant was obtained in a shady and less honest way than it should have been. >> my experience with fisa, request for fisa authorizations,
1:27 pm
this is not a casual process. there is great rig or put into this. the basis for the request must be corroborating evidence. by the way, the fisa court is not a pushover. they're not a rubber stamp. they are, my characterization of their demeanor and the way they comport themselves is one offer reluctant skepticism. so there's a pretty high bar that you have to pass to get a fisa authorization request in the first place. as i understand it, this was an extension of the original fisa request, meaning that, or implying that, apparently there was information considered valuable that was being obtained via the initial fisa request. they have finite dates. in other words, they have deadlines. they aren't indefinite. so when the time was up for the
1:28 pm
initial fisa report, the fisa request, it was time to get an extension. so on its face, i don't know that the dossier played in this very much at all. it could be considered corroborating. although we did not include the dossier in our original assessment that we published last january -- >> including a summary. >> it was separate however, some of what was in it was corroborated by the assessment derive from other sources of information. so it shouldn't completely dismisser totally what is in the dossier. steele was regarded as a retired
1:29 pm
former intelligence offer in the uk intelligence service. >> how damaging would it be? do you agree with democrats who are saying, this is just an attempt to destroy the fbi, to protect president trump? >> it certainly has that appearance. now they are acting as an agent on behalf of the white house and putting out a one party partisan memo he and then refusing to allow the democrats to publish, put out their rebuttal. so to me, this is, has the experience of purely a political stunt. >> general clapper, always good to see you. appreciate it. don't gofully where. we have much more breaking news
1:30 pm
>> reporter: the fbi agent that some hold out as an example. new information about that agent you're going to want to hear. stay with us. we packed new banquet mega bowls full of majestic piles of cheddar mac n cheese, smothered in mozzarella. but it wasn't mega. so we topped it with protein packed chunks of buffalo-style chicken. now that's mega.
1:31 pm
1:32 pm
1:33 pm
your insurance on time. tap one little bumper, and up go your rates. what good is having insurance if you get punished for using it? news flash: nobody's perfect. for drivers with accident forgiveness, liberty mutual won't raise your rates due to your first accident. switch and you could save $782 on home and auto insurance. call for a free quote today. liberty stands with you™ liberty mutual insurance. we know life can be hectic. that's why, at xfinity, we've been working hard to simplify your experiences with us. now, with instant text and email updates, you'll always be up to date. you can easily add premium channels, so you don't miss your favorite show. and with just a single word, find all the answers you're looking for -
1:34 pm
because getting what you need should be simple, fast, and easy. download the xfinity my account app or go online today. . more breaking news involving peter strzok. the official who was demoted after the anti-trump text messages. now cnn is learning that he had a major role in reopening that clinton e-mail investigation just ten days before the 2016 election. that's a decision you might recall that hillary clinton blames for her loss in the election. we have cnn on capitol hill breaking this story for us. tell us what you found. >> yeah. e-mails that we have obtained
1:35 pm
show that peter strzok played a key role in that major decision days before the 2016 election to send to it congress, reopening the clinton e-mail investigation, upending the clinton campaign at a such a critical motel. campaign season. these october 27, 2016 e-mails that we have obtained show that peter stocks are wrote the first draft, co-wrote it with another colleague, and they sent to it other fbi officials. and that was the base i of the letter sent to congress opening the investigation. we are told separately by a source familiar with it. that the e-mails were on the lap top of that disgraced former congressman anthony weiner. this is significant because strzok has been accused by republicans of being biased
1:36 pm
because of the text messages that congress has obtained, between him and lis, saying that they were unfair to president trump, but clearly he was involved in another key matter about the letter and he that letter, as you know, hillary ton blamed for costing her the presidency. >> but you have some information about private reservation that's strzok had about making the letter public? >> that's right. i spoke to a source familiar with strzok's thinking on it. on the one hand strzok wants to pursue the criminal investigation aggressively, especially after the weiner laptop was discovered. strzok felt like we have to see where they goes. tapt, he and lisa page, you can see they have some an rebhengs
1:37 pm
how skm doing this so publicly and making public announcements days before the presidential election in one of the text messages exchanges. you see that page is saying things like, we're not sure we should go public with this and strzok actually agrees with her. that's on the same day that comey sent yet another public her to congress closing the clinton investigation. on november 6, just two days before the election. >> what might this mean for the investigations on capitol hill going forward? >> it shows that what we have learned publicly, the release of the text messages, are a slice of the larger picture that both members of congress are investigating as well as the attorney general. that these may not reflect the full picture of what peter strzok was doing. we know about two house panels
1:38 pm
investigating the fbi actions, as well as the senate judiciary committee, also moving forward. the question was he simply out to get trump campaign, some things that may have made the clinton campaign uncomfortable as well. >> and the justice department's office revealed some 50,000 messages between strzok and the fbi lawyer, lisa page. >> the inspector general announced that he had uncovered some of the missing text messages from a pretty critical five-month span from december to may of 2016. so right before the special counsel was appointed last year. we don't know how many there are and whether any bear on these issues. the justice department will eventually review them and turn
1:39 pm
them over. >> all right. thank you. let me start with you. >> that complicates the picture a bit. >> it totally complicates the picture. the three of us, reporters here, no one can figure out what's going on. house oversight, it's vast. there's been a call for a special prosecutor on these e-mails. that may end up being the case. let me push book one narrative. i was out on the campaign during october. i can tell you the president was on his way to winning. the momentum was surging in our favor long before this happened. >> it wasological hillary's opinion. >> no, sir.
1:40 pm
i wanted hillary to win. you wanted trump to win. we're going to see it through our partisan lens. they were just number crunchers. it is pretty easy to do. they narrowed it down and they say the comey letter 11 days before the election, apparently strzok was involved in, swung michigan, wisconsin, pennsylvania, at one point, each won by less than one and north carolina and arizona. hillary clinton would have won comfortably but for jim comey interveni intervening. >> feelings aren't facts. >> we're not going to settle this now. >> do you know who won that race? the president won that race. >> let's turn it back to peter strzok for one second. does it complicate your view that he was biassed if he was in
quote
1:41 pm
favor of reopening the case against hillary clinton, although according to the justice department, he was also concerned about making the letter public. does this give democrats pushback? >> the crime of the century was stealing the presidency. and the fbi letter -- >> by comey. >> by comey. >> not by trump. >> had right. director comey. that's what swung the election at the end. the fact special agent strzok was involved, yes, there were e-mails, messages between himself and another person. throws private views. their public actions as public officials involved the fbi in a presidential election. it is completely unprecedented. unethical. against guidelines. it makes jim comey vaguely nauseous. it makes me sick. >> what swung the election was hillary clinton's war on coal. she was completely out of touch
1:42 pm
with the working class, the democrats in pennsylvania, the obama guns, god and religion comment. deplorables. >> so a comment eight years before the election was more important than the fbi director? by the way, he was investigating the trump things too. he never leaked that. >> you take a ride, ask if they remember guns, god and religion. that resonates to there day. >> you wouldn't say that he didn't help that. >> let me explain to you why. >> everybody had it wrong. you had it wrong. >> you had it right. you're a friend of mine.
1:43 pm
he was saying, watch out. watch out in pennsylvania. there's something happening here. a lot of people saw and it were looking at it. just because one thing happened, that doesn't mean there is a nexus. >> why did they say, you can't mess around with it. we don't want these. >> peter strzok is somebody that the president criticizes. here's a tweet from president trump. where the 50,000 important text messages between fbi lovers? blaming samsung. this is before the text messages were recovered by the inspector general. will the white house have to respond to the fact -- no. you don't think so. >> no. this just fits into the narrative, there might be a need for further investigation into this whole matter. >> a new special investigation. >> if he is saying that jim comey threw the election -- >> absolutely.
1:44 pm
>> are you calling for a special counsel? >> no. it's not a crime. it is sleazy and unethical but it is not a crime. >> complete the investigation into the russian collusion but not jim comey collusion? that's what you're saying. >>? i don't think he is saying it is collusion what direct or many did was not a crime. it was unconscionable but not a crime. >> what the drugs was completely abhorrent. they didn't collude with the campaign. >> that's what mueller will tell us. >> i cannot wait for the mueller -- it will be a set of facts. i believe he will provide a time line with what happened, who did what. and he will present it to the congress. >> while we're on this subject. i want to talk about the nunes memo. president trump has made it clear that he wants this released even though the fbi director, christopher wray, said
1:45 pm
he didn't want it released. listen to the marine attorney general ask about this memo. >> it will be released here pretty quick and the whole world can see it. >> do you think things changed the next day? >> i'll let all the experts decide that when it is released. this president, again, it is so unique that he wants everything out. so the american people can make up their own minds. >> so that means he is releasing his tax returns. the tax returns are central to this case. was the president compromised. i'll say this. this memo better be big. this better be mt. everest. this better be cataclysmic. the wind up here is amazing. there had better be a hell of a
1:46 pm
pitch. >> i will agree my esteamed colleague here, in that the juice better be worth the squeeze. there's a big build-up. whatever is coming out of it. this is six news cycles on the memo and it will be about a 15-minute segment. >> i'm excited to find out what's in the memo. i also want to see the democrat ikt response and i would love if the underlying intelligence, it's as much as possible, without compromising sources and methods, and the fisa could be seen so we could see if everything about it was based on the steele dossier. you heard general clapper, retired from the air force and director, saying he thought it was supplemental. >> there's so much going. on so many moving parts. i can understand the white house, the president, and the
1:47 pm
chief of staff want for clarity. want for the public to be fully involved. that's something they need push for. >> but is this memo -- >> i'm not sure. i talked to members of the house who have been a part of it and they aren't wild eyed doctorses. and they say there's some smoke and there's some fire. >> the president seems to be at war with the fbi and in love with russia. maybe it is because the fbi is investigating whether he was in bed we russia. it's crazy. the president hits back ten times harder. >> about 100 russian oligarchs who are sweating it out because of what was released. >> thank you. we have more breaking news. an amtrak train taking republican lawmakers to a
1:48 pm
retrer retreat. all that is coming up. or strok. can one medicine help treat both blood sugar and cardiovascular risk? i asked my doctor. he told me about non-insulin victoza®. victoza® is not only proven to lower a1c and blood sugar, but for people with type 2 diabetes treating their cardiovascular disease, victoza® is also approved to lower the risk of major cv events such as heart attack, stroke, or death. and while not for weight loss, victoza® may help you lose some weight. (announcer) victoza® is not for people with type 1 diabetes or diabetic ketoacidosis. do not take victoza® if you have a personal or family history of medullary thyroid cancer, multiple endocrine neoplasia syndrome type 2, or if you are allergic to victoza® or any of its ingredients. stop taking victoza® and get medical help right away if you get a lump or swelling in your neck or symptoms of a serious allergic reaction such as rash, swelling, difficulty breathing, or swallowing. serious side effects may happen, including pancreatitis.
1:49 pm
so stop taking victoza® and call your doctor right away if you have severe pain in your stomach area. tell your doctor your medical history. gallbladder problems have happened in some people. tell your doctor right away if you get symptoms. taking victoza® with a sulfonylurea or insulin may cause low blood sugar. common side effects are nausea, diarrhea, vomiting, decreased appetite, indigestion, and constipation. side effects can lead to dehydration, which may cause kidney problems. change the course of your treatment. ask your doctor about victoza®.
1:50 pm
when you can squeeze one in wbetween friday and monday at hilton?n there's a vacation at the end of every week. whatever type of weekender you are, don't let another weekend pass you by. get the lowest price when you book at hilton.com
1:51 pm
1:52 pm
we're back with our national lead. members of congress witnessed a tragedy. they were going to a political retreat in west virginia. they collided with a garbage truck in virginia today. the driver of the truck was killed and at least six people have been hospitalized. the national transportation safety board is on the scene. phil mattingley is in charlottesville. do we know how this happened yet? >> the investigation ongoing. according to people on the seasonable and involved with the crash, here's what we know at this point. the garbage truck was coming up on a parallel road to the train. it tried to take a left. ended getting stuck on the tracks. whether something stalled out, it is being looked into. one thing was clear. there was not nearly enough time
1:53 pm
for the train conductor to react. >> we were moving at a pretty rapid pace and it didn't seem there was any time for the train to slow down at all. i didn't feel any slowing before the impact. >> no braking before the impact. that was the first thing lawmakers felt. several saying how they flew over seats. they also had family members with them. there were cuts, bruises, one lawmaker in a concussion protocol. the main concern, the individuals on the garbage truck. one individual dead. another seriously injured. one thing lawmakers did right after the crash, several of them doctors, sprinted off the train to administer aid including brad from ohio who you were calling an iraq come bat veteran and surgeon who helped save the life of steve scalise during the baseball shooting just last year. >> and republican there's continue on with the retreat?
1:54 pm
>> reporter: that's right. the train was towed here to charlottesville. they boarded buses to go on to greenbriar. you can see them filing out. there were discussions about whether or not to postpone but tonight mike pence will be there to give a speech. tomorrow the president will arrive as well. this is a debate policy meeting they want to have. >> thanks so much. a sad story. another republican committee chairman just announced he will not be seeking re-election. is the republican party fearing a blue wave in 2018? stay with us. luckily, office depot® officemax® is here to take care of you. ♪ taking care of business with print services done right. on time. guaranteed! expert tech support. and this week all dell pcs are up to twenty five percent off! save even more when you purchase a dell monitor. and make sure you protect your investment. office depot® officemax.
1:55 pm
officedepot.com ♪ taking care of business i'm your phone,istle text alert. stuck down here between your seat and your console, playing a little hide-n-seek. cold... warmer... warmer... ah boiling. jackpot. and if you've got cut-rate car insurance, you could be picking up these charges yourself. so get allstate, where agents help keep you protected from mayhem... ...like me. mayhem is everywhere. are you in good hands?
1:56 pm
1:57 pm
1:58 pm
1:59 pm
today the house oversight committee trey gowdy announced he will not run for re-election. his departure makes nine current republican committee leaders planning to leave congress. you can make that ten if you count jason chaifetz who left last year. they both chaired the government and oversight committee. gowdy was part of the investigation with benghazi. he wrote whatever skills i have are better utilized in a courtroom than conscience and i
2:00 pm
enjoy our justice system more than our political system. that's it for "the lead" today. i turn it over now to brianna keeler but also in "the situation room." the fbi director clashes with the man who hired him, president trump. the fbi says it has grave concerns about the accuracy of that memo which the president has vowed to release. my team of the deputy attorney general rod rosenstein asked the president for help in resisting the house intel chairman, the man behind the memo. instead, the president asked rosenstein if he is on his team. is this another loyalty request? train